When comparing the evolution in market share of Linux and OpenBSD, two operating systems that were born around the same time, a question comes to mind: why is there such a difference in market penetration? Linux, on one side of the spectrum, with a license that supposedly impairs commercial venues, has enticed companies and organizations to adopt and support it under varying commercial models, while the BSD derivatives (FreeBSD, OpenBSD and NetBSD), with a larger history and an allegedly more commercial friendly license haven't been as successful to gather a large installed base and widespread adoption.

Because there is no comercial interest in developing your code with a license that allows your competitors to grab your code, build something on top of it, publish a competig product and not release the changes that the competitor made. On GPL all competitors have to stay on the same leveled playing field once there is "redistribution" (on GPLv2... whatever it's called on GPLv3) and so it is a certainty for all competitors that there will be competition... but at least no one will be "freeloading" on any other.